Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Unreleased Zoids

The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was delete. Cirt (talk) 03:21, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Unreleased Zoids

(Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL)

This is a trivial list of canceled toys with absolutely nothing to verify their existence. TTN (talk) 16:58, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

By "nothing," you mean other than the pictures of said toys on the page in the references section? Or are you suggesting those are fakes, or...? 159.182.1.4 (talk) 19:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Delete. I did Google search for a couple of the ones with unusual enough names to avoid false positives; "Bio-Diplodocus" has only ten results, "Energy Zaber" has only 7. The conclusion I draw from this is that not only do these unreleased toys fail Wikipedia's standards for notability, they barely pass Wikipedia's standards for verifiability, and are not of general interest even to fans. Abductive (reasoning) 19:38, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, JForget 22:56, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion so consensus may be reached.
Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, NW (Talk) 01:30, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Delete per Abductive. Picking one at random, Holotech Energy Liger, I got zero Google hits excluding mirrors and forks. Not even a mention on the site which 159.182.1.4 points to as a (the only) "reference". Actually, there are no pictures at all on the page linked, but I did search all the other pages of the site and did not find it. So working back the other way, picking one at random from the "reference" which does have a picture, Deathsaurer, I find that this is indeed in the article. But what does the website say about this model? - "This version is a custom made by a friend, which can represent what could have been this Deathsaurer...." So it is a one off toy made by an unidentified friend of the owner of an obscure private website as a guess at something that never existed. Pretty close to the perfect example of non-notable I'd say. One more quote from the reference web-site relevant to Deathsaurer; "This section is maybe one of the most important of this site...and second because it is here that we will see items absolutely unknown or very partially." By their own admission their most important page is non-notable. SpinningSpark 13:47, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.